Loading...
1992-24793-Minutes for Meeting July 15,1992 Recorded 7/23/199292-24'793 0118-133'7 PUBLIC HEARING MINUTES REALIGNMENT OF BROOKSWOOD BOULEVARD92 (+ 23 AM ; 43 DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS July 15, 1992 i'7 %': ' d HOLL'``' Chairman Maudlin called the meeting to order at 5:35 p.m. Board members in attendance were: Dick Maudlin, Tom Throop and Nancy Pope Schlangen. Also present were: Paul Blikstad, Planner and Bruce White, Assistant County Counsel. Before the Board was a public hearing on the Bend-LaPine School District No. 1's request for a Plan Amendment to move the location of Brookswood Boulevard on the Bend/Deschutes County Transportation Plan Map. Chairman Maudlin opened the public hearing and asked for a staff report. Paul Blikstad said Brookswood Boulevard was a designated arterial which was established on the Transportation Plan Map as a north - south alternative to Highway 97 for the Bend area approximately 13 years ago. A hearing on this alignment amendment was held in conjunction with the School District Application for a conditional use and site plan for the new elementary school to be located west of the Homestead and Romaine Village subdivisions and a major land partition to divide a 15 -acre school site from the remainder of the Thompson family property. The Hearings Officer approved the partition for the property and the conditional use and site plan for the school. The Hearings Officer also recommended approval of the plan amendment for the Brookswood realignment in his May 21, 1992, Findings and Decision. Part of the Hearings Officer's findings included language from the Bend Area General Plan which stated that the alignment of Brookswood Avenue would extend from Wilson Avenue south to Baker Road and parallel to Highway 97. It would pass through an undeveloped section which was partially identified as open space (Thompson property). The alignment through this area was intended to be flexible to accommodate the protection of open space, while providing for the street. The County Public Works Department had submitted a memorandum stating their support for the proposed change for the following reasons: (1) the route avoided cutting through the middle of the 242 acre Thompson property; (2) the relocated road would provide a direct access and road frontage to the entire western edge of the 15 -acre elementary school site; (3) the proposed route would require only a very short extension of Poplar Street to connect with Brookswood to the subdivisions to the east (Homestead and Romaine Village); (4) the proposed route would make use of the existing right of way of Rancho Road for part of its distance thereby reducing the amount of right of way needing to be purchase compared to the route PAGE 1 MINUTES: 7-15-92 U 1 ' 0.18-1338 currently shown on the Transportation Plan; and (5) the proposed route would not require the removal of any dwelling units as could be determined from air photos, while the route in the plan would require removal of one or possibly two existing dwellings units. Therefore, it was Planning Staff's position as well as the County Public Works Department's position that this plan amendment should be approved to move the alignment. Mr. Blikstad indicated on a map the location of the elementary school and how the parcel was split. Chairman Maudlin asked for testimony from those people in favor of the realignment. Bob Lovlien testified that he represented series of land use applications relative schools throughout the Bend district. The school site would be on a 15 -acre site v school district by the Thompson family. from a much larger parcel which was is special interest in the Bend Area General: a very large open meadow which was use, conditional use and site plan approva. regarding the improvements which the sc required to make on Brookswood, and tl Amethyst, etc. They had worked with the r number of issues. The issue before the Bc the School District on a to the siting of several new southwest elementary hich was donated to the This 15 acres was split entified as an area of Ilan because it contained I by an elk herd. The .s contained conditions hool district would be e extension of Poplar, eighborhood to resolve a and this evening was the relocation of Brookswood. He said that Brookswood had been shown on the Bend Area Transportation Plan since at least 1980. The Bend Area General Plan identified this route as a "flexible location" with no specific reasons for siting the road in one location versus another, and no engineering or siting studies had ever been done on where this road should be located. He felt someone had just taken a felt marker and drawn a straight line down into the Deschutes River Woods area when the plan was originally done. The school district hired Hickman Williams and Company to make sure that the proposed relocation was a feasible relocation, and Public Works agreed that it was. The realignment would move the road out of the middle of the Thompson's meadow rather than bisect it. This realignment accommodated the topography and geography of the area. They concurred with the reasons set forth by Dick Johnson, County Public Works, in his memorandum. Chairman Maudlin asked if the School District had agreed to pay or do anything for the donated 15 -acre piece of property. Mr. Lovlien said they had agreed to pay approximately $5,000 to defray legal fees for this property. Chairman Maudlin asked if this alignment were approved, when would the road be built and who would build it? Mr. Lovlien said the school district would build Brookswood from Poplar Avenue north to the edge of their property as soon as it was approved. When the remainder of Brookswood Boulevard would be built would depend on: (1) whether the Thompsons decided to develop their property and he wasn't aware that they had any development plans; and (2) the Brookswood corridor north would PAGE 2 MINUTES: 7-15-92 0.18-1339 depend on whether the County had money to fund it or whether there was development along it which would pay for it. He suggested that nothing might happen on this road for 10 years except for the school district portion. The access to the school would be on Poplar and Amethyst. The children from the Deschutes River Woods subdivision would still be bused to the site using Highway 97 and Poplar. Chairman Maudlin asked if it wouldn't be cheaper for the school district to build the entire road rather than purchasing four new busses. Mr. Lovlien said they were already bussing these children so they would not have to purchase any more busses. He said Lodgepole was being extended to where Brookswood ended now, and there would be an additional north/south access at that point which would serve the neighborhoods without the urban growth boundary. Tim Breeden 19208 Shoshoni Rd, Deschutes River Woods (DRW), testified as a representative the Deschutes River Woods Homeowners Association. He asked that the members in support of this proposal raise their hands. A majority of the people in attendance raised their hands. He said Brookswood Boulevard was of crucial interest to the residents of Deschutes River Woods since it would provide them with a secondary fire escape route. During the Awbrey Hall fire, traffic was backed up approximately 2 miles while trying to get out onto Highway 97. The flames came to within 1/8 mile of Baker Road where they were waiting. This subdivision should never have been platted without a secondary access, however they wanted to stay. This road would also allow from another escape route if there was a toxic spill on the railroad grade. They felt the route chosen for the realignment of Brookswood Boulevard seemed to go through fewer homesites than the original route. Chairman Maudlin asked if they would be in favor even if the original alignment were used. Mr. Breeden said there were a number of residents in DRW who preferred that the road go along the existing rights of way. Ober Hall, 18970 Obsidian Road, testified that he was one of the two vice presidents of the homeowners association. They were very much in favor of a second exit for DRW for another reason: if Brookswood Blvd. was completed, the school buses wouldn't have to go onto Highway 97. This was a safety and cost issue. He estimated there were over 4,500 people who lived in DRW, and they needed another exit. They had no police protection other than the County, so they had formed a neighborhood watch program. Rod Cathcart, 19822 Ponderosa St., Homestead Subdivision, testified in favor of the school and the road construction project. He said they had been meeting with the School District which had been very helpful with their community concerns. Betty Marquette, PO Box 1138, Sisters, testified that she owned lot 85C, and she was concerned about the traffic. She wondered if the County could pave Buck Canyon Road. There was currently a red cinder road which she helped pay for. Chairman Maudlin said the PAGE 3 MINUTES: 7-15-92 0118-1040 Board would be happy to consider a local improvement district for this area. Commissioner Throop said the County's resources were limited so the County was only funding major arterials. New collectors and local roads were the responsibility of the abutting property owners. Ms. Marquette said she felt the County had picked the best route. John Jackson, 59859 Navajo, DRW, testified recently there was a major accident at Baker Street and Highway 97 at about 5 p.m. The traffic back up all the way to Murphy Road to the north and to the south "it was quite a ways back toward Lava Butte." The emergency service vehicles could not get through the traffic to reach the accident. If there was another route, 1/3 to 1/2 of this traffic would have gone another way. Commissioner Throop said he had met John Jackson at a couple of recent DRW Homeowners Association meetings and asked Mr. Jackson to introduce himself to the rest of the Board. Mr. Jackson said he was the neighborhood watch for DRW. They started the program about 4 months ago and during that time there was a drastic change in the crime in the area. The fire department told him that over the 4th of July, they received 150 fewer calls from DRW than normal. He worked closely with the Sheriff's Department which he felt reduced the crime in the area. Louisea Hall, treasurer for the DRW homeowners Assn., testified that John Jackson monitored 9-1-1 calls and had already saved one person's life. Merle Hammerly, 60306 Tumalo Circle, DRW, complained that the facility for this hearing did not have a public address system. He said a number of people in the back of the room could not hear what was being said. Chairman Maudlin said he would ask everyone to speak up. Mr. Hammerly also felt the people who were testifying should face the public, not the Commissioners. Commissioner Throop pointed out that the purpose of this meeting was for the public to come and talk with the Board of Commissioners, not to the people in the audience. Peggy Cannon, 59956 Navajo Road, DRW, testified that she appreciated the number of times Commissioner Throop had come to their homeowners meetings. Many of the people in the area were retired, and the recent fire made them realize how vulnerable they were. She also complained about the lack of a PA system and that there were not enough information packets for everyone. If they could not hear, they were unable to give rebuttal on what others were saying. As a previous school bus driver, she saw the value of Brookswood Blvd. for the safety of the children. She didn't care which route was picked. Ray L. Rogers, 19434 Piute Circle, testified that a chemical spill on Highway 97 would cut them off, and they would be unable to leave the area. He reiterated that they needed this road for an alternate access. PAGE 4 MINUTES: 7-15-92 0.18-1341 Chairman Maudlin asked if there was anyone who wished to speak in opposition to the realignment. William Caldwell, 60680 Rancho Road, said that he had not been informed about the proposed change in alignment of Brookswood Blvd. He wanted an opportunity to review the materials and suggest another alternative to going down Rancho Road. The road realignment would come within 50 feet of the corner of his property. He was concerned about the traffic. Chairman Maudlin said there had already been hearings at the Planning Commission and before the Hearings Officer on this issue and these hearings were advertized in the newspaper. Mr. Caldwell said no one on Rancho Road was notified of this change. He agreed that DRW needed a second exit, but he didn't want it to go down Rancho Road. He didn't understand why the original alignment could not be used. Commissioner Throop said this was the hearing at which he should make his case for why the road should not go as proposed. Carrie Koepke, 61445 SE 27th #135, testified that she owned 12.4 acres (lot 126 on the corner of Rancho and Buck Canyon Road) which the proposed alignment would bisect. They were also not notified of the change in alignment. They were working on their property on Memorial Day weekend when a neighbor asked if they were aware of the new road alignment. They weren't necessarily opposed to the road but had many concerns and questions. The zoning was RR -10 and they had been told they could not subdivide their property. If they road went through the middle, one side of their property would be useless. Would they be able to subdivide the property then? Chairman Maudlin said a number of questions had been raised which the Board would have to consider before making its decision. Commissioner Throop suggested that the owners of the parcels being divided by the road come in and sit down with representatives from the County Planning staff and legal staff to find out what their options were. Ms. Koepke said they needed to know exactly where the road would go because they were going to start building a home and they didn't want it condemned. Commissioner Throop asked what the time frame was for a decision on this application? Bruce White suggested asking the applicant if they had some time constraints. Chairman Maudlin said the Board would take the time to get the information necessary to make a decision within the next week or ten days. Lynn McKoy, 60630 Rancho Road, TL 3701, testified that the new alignment would divide her property. She asked if the original alignment which was approved 13 years ago, had been recorded. Chairman Maudlin said this road alignment was "drawn in the air." He remarked that every time the County said they were going to build a road, the public thought it was engraved in stone when it was an approximate line in the air. He said it would not have been recorded and was only on the transportation master plan which was always subject to change. Commissioner Throop said the PAGE 5 MINUTES: 7-15-92 0118-1342 transportation plan just established a corridor, and then a specific alignment was considered when the road was closer to being constructed. Ms. McKoy said they moved on this property in August of last year before they found out about the transportation plan. She asked that the Board consider looking at other proposals for this road. She felt it should be further west and suggested Lower Buck Canyon Road. She thought the proposed location would still create a bottleneck at Baker Road. Chairman Maudlin pointed out that the only portion of the road being built was the area along the school, and the remainder was still subject to change. Ms. McKoy asked if she put her house up for sale, would she have to tell potential buyers that a proposed road might go through her property. Commissioner Throop said it was the responsibility of buyers to look into the land use issues on property before buying. Chairman Maudlin said she should check with her realtor. Commissioner Throop asked where her house was on the parcel. It appeared she would be 40 feet from the pavement. They reviewed aerial photographs to see which dwellings might be affected by the new alignment. Ron Richardson, 60620 Rancho Road, Lot 3700, testified that both road alignments would affect his property which he just purchased. His home was approximately in the center of his lot. He wanted to know how long they would have to wait to find out exactly where the road would go, since they would like to rebuild on the property. He felt the road could be placed through empty parcels of land without affecting anyone's home. He was in favor of the road but felt there could be a better alignment. Chairman Maudlin asked if the Board could decide on the road alignment for only the requested application and deal with the remainder of the road at another time. Bruce White said he didn't think it was necessary to approve a realignment for the school. He felt the school district was just reacting to the transportation element language stating that the alignment through the area was intended to be flexible to accommodate the protection of the open space while providing for the street. He thought they were trying to accommodate the open space by proposing this alignment. Bob Lovlien said part of the reason for the realignment was to deal with the Thompson's property, however they were at this hearing only to ask that Brookswood be sited to the Urban Growth Boundary. They were asked to show if there was a feasible route south, not to actually fix the route. They determined that there was a feasible route that didn't take out any homes and utilized some right of way. The actual route south of the UGB would have to be sited "some other way, some other time." He said the school district was under sever time pressures to get this school open. They felt the road from the UGB north was set, however the road to the south had a lot of flexibility. Hickman Williams had at least three different alternatives which they reviewed, and John Rexford said PAGE 6 MINUTES: 7-15-92 0118-1.343 the school district would be willing to go to the area and stake the center line of the road as proposed to hopefully speed along the process for the County to identify a more permanent corridor. The alignment the school district submitted was not the only place the road could be located. Commissioner Throop said he didn't want to take the southern portion of that road off the map. Also the citizens of Deschutes River Woods were very interested in finding a permanent second access. The County was in the process of constructing a temporary emergency access south of Baker Road, and the contingency which Burlington Northern agreed to was that the County site and begin planning for development of a permanent access. The Public Works Department had identified this road as a very high priority on their list of transportation improvements and felt it should be placed on the five-year Major Road Capital Improvement Program. He suggested the County "bite the bullet" and decide where that road should be located now. He felt that regardless of where the road was located, some property owners would "be wiped out." However, he felt these people would like to know as soon as possible specifically where that corridor was going to be located. Chairman Maudlin said he wasn't advocating not making a decision on the entire route. He was just suggesting that the Board make a decision for the school, and then take a longer look at the southern alignment. Commissioner Throop asked staff about what the proceedings were before the Hearings Officer on this issue. Paul Blikstad said the focus of the hearing before the Hearings Officer wasn't the alignment of Brookswood, but the importance of having it built as soon as possible. Chairman Maudlin asked if the people who testified from tax lots 37 and 3701 were at the hearings before the hearings officer. People from the crowd said no. Commissioner Throop asked whether it would be more advisable to consider this route in its entirety or in steps. Mr. Blikstad said the work on this alignment was already finished. Public Works reviewed the alternatives and made their recommendation. Somebody would be impacted no matter which route was picked. Bruce White felt it was best to deal with the road as a package, otherwise the alignment on the transportation map would not connect. Paul Blikstad pointed out that if the County wanted to change the alignment in the future, it could hold the necessary hearings and do so. William Caldwell asked to testify again. He asked why the alignment was changed from the straight route. Chairman Maudlin said it was to save the maximum amount of open space and to separate the property so that a portion could be given to the school district. Also the straight alignment would have required that two homes be demolished. Mr. Caldwell said the straight alignment looked like it went right down the property lines and shouldn't destroy any homes. He felt the only advantage to the new PAGE 7 MINUTES: 7-15-92 F 0118-1344 alignment was an enhancement of the Thompson property at the expense of other properties. Chairman Maudlin announced that this public hearing was closed for oral testimony, however written testimony would be allowed until July 20 at 5 p.m. The Board would make their decision at their regular Board meeting at 10 a.m. on Wednesday, July 22, 1992. No public comment would be taken at that time. DATED this dam day of Commissioners of Deschutes ( ATT T: Recording Secretary PAGE 8 MINUTES: 7-15-92 , 1992, by the Board of ssioner Nancy Pope Sc1h1an*n, Commissioner ck audl n, airman